Posted on 08/22/2015 8:24:54 PM PDT by American Faith Today
Radical feminist website RH Reality Check published a hit piece on Thursday against Holly O’Donnell, a whistleblower featured in several of the undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s harvesting of unborn babies’ organs and tissue. Sharona Coutts – a former reporter at ProPublica and the site’s vice president for “investigations and research” – revealed O’Donnell’s alleged sexual preferences, after finding her profile on the OKCupid dating website, as well as posts on other sites.
Coutts’s hatchet job actually sparked a backlash among many liberals on Twitter and other online outlets, who accused the author of “slut shaming” the former StemExpress employee. The pro-abortion website quietly removed the article mere hours after they posted it due to the outcry. However, it is still available on Google’s cache, as of early Friday afternoon.
On Friday, “Another angry woman” blog slammed RH Reality Check for their “misogynistic attack on O’Donnell.” The moderator of the blog attacked the site from the left: “Coutts identified O’Donnell on dating websites through her pictures. This is pretty much the kind of creepy stalkerish behaviour we expect from the anti-choice lobby….Coutts even published the usernames O’Donnell was using on various dating websites, exposing her to online harassment.” The author added that “you claim that you’re exposing hypocrisy, but it is you who are the hypocrites here. You’re sex-shaming a woman.”
Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.
When “Another angry woman” noticed that RH Reality Check took down the article, she responded, “this is not good enough. They need to address the issue and apologise to Ms O’Donnell for their misogynistic, sex-shaming harassment.”
The response on Twitter to Coutts’s hit piece was just as brutal. Australian feminist Jackie McMillian replied to the RH Reality Check vice president’s personal Twitter account: “Your article today on @rhrealitycheck is highly abhorrent journalism. You bring shame upon yourself for writing it.” Amy Dentata Tweeted, “I’m sorry @rhrealitycheck but the only thing your creepy article does is make me feel bad for a pro-lifer. Probably not what you intended.” One Twitter user also pointed out that the article violated “several parts of [your] own code of ethics.”
On Friday morning, RH Reality Check’s editor in chief, Jodi Jacobson, posted a note on Coutts’s article. Jacobson admitted that the “piece, which has now been taken down, was controversial and upset a number of our colleagues and allies. Indeed, there was vociferous internal disagreement even on our staff about the piece.” She continued that she took “full responsibility for what was an ill-considered decision to publish this article.”
However, as conservative Twitter user Jay Caruso pointed out, Jacobson’s “‘apology’…is just a rehash of their original smear but without photos & salacious details.” Caruso has a point, given these paragraphs from the editor in chief’s post:
We believed answers to the question, “Who is Holly O’Donnell,” were germane to the political debate in which she has placed herself front and center, and from which she has never sought to recuse herself in the weeks since the videos including her came out.
That said, our piece clearly crossed a line by providing far too much information about her personal life, which in turn made it seem like we were engaging in the same practice of shaming someone for sex we decry on the right. Targeting O’Donnell’s personal life is, unlike, say, Josh Duggar, unlikely to influence public perceptions of the anti-choice movement as a whole. To target her and open her up to harassment based on her sexual preferences was wrong.
It was also a mistake to include these preferences framed in a similar light as her apparent fascination on public social media accounts with Adolf Hitler, as if all of those behaviors were equal.
Jacobson again took “full responsibility for these mistakes” near the end of the article, but never made an actual apology to O’Donnell.
bookmark
How evil does the left have to be when they equate a cheating spouse with someone exposing the trafficking and harvesting of human beings and their remains for profit?
Oh NM, we all know the answer to that.
Indeed- they are plenty evil.
Guess these leftists thought pro-lifers would dump O’Donnell based on this. They must not know the pro-life movement welcomes those who reveal what goes on in the babykilling offices!
the real hate is on the left
Who she is changes nothing with respect to people chopping babies into bits and selling the meat.
O’Donnell is O’Donnell is one very messed up puppy! She admitted to cutting open a living baby’s head because she was instructed to. I am very grateful that she is out there speaking the truth about Planned Parenthood. However, I believe pro-lifers should be very cautious about ever elevating her to any kind of hero status.
I went to the cache link to read the now deleted article.
Man, that was some skeevy stuff. It took a certain kind of witch (or something that rhymes with witch) to have penned something that hateful and chock full of irrelevant information.
Fortunately, it won’t be long until science catches up to their antics but it will still take the public to pursue the cause. That is what is so horrible, takes so long to make changes and actually save lives. We will look back on this time as barbaric!
The fifth commandment can be understood to include an admonition against the “killing” of a person’s reputation. These people just can’t get enough of it, killing that is.
The real hate indeed is on the left.
I think too that if their conscience hasn’t already been seared (which sadly for many it has), it’s a defense mechanism to try to rationalize, obfuscate, or justify what’s going on so they can sleep better at night- I guess.
I don’t know if I even want to know what motivates such depraved minds.
I agree with you. I can’t begin to understand why she would do that. Well, I guess I can if she thought she needed to in order to keep her job. Which in no way whatsoever justifies or excuses it. At least that was the moment when she realized she could no longer work there. But I too wish she would have made that decision a few minutes sooner.
Nevertheless,she’s a target of the left and the pro death crowd now because she dared to tell the truth. I don’t happily claim her or want to elevate her to hero status. But I’ll certainly fight against the depraved lunatics on the other side with all I have.
Well you actually went deeper into it than I did then. Given no doubt how much they hate her right now, I shouldn’t be surprised.
More than one wise person has said that the thing evil hates the most is to be exposed. And when it is, those doing it seek to destroy whoever shines that light on them.
That’s an interesting way to look at that I honestly can’t recall if I’ve seen or heard or not. Certainly there’s not bearing false witness, which isn’t necessarily what this is. But yeah, they’re out to figuratively kill her now without a doubt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.